Research Paper

Neurodiversity at work

Ref: 09/16

2016 Helen Bewley and Anitha George National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR)

-

Disclaimer

The views in this Research Paper are the authors' own and do not necessarily reflect those of Acas

or the Acas Council. Any errors or inaccuracies are the responsibility of the authors alone.

For any further information on this study, or other aspects of the Acas Research and Evaluation programme, please email research@acas.org.uk

Acas research publications can be found at www.acas.org.uk/researchpapers

ISBN 978-1-908370-71 6

www.acas.org.uk/researchpapers

Neurodiversity at work

Helen Bewley

Anitha George

September 2016

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements ....................................................................................3

1. Motivation .......................................................................................4

1.1 Introduction and terminology..........................................................4 1.2 Research questions .......................................................................6 1.3 The conduct of fieldwork ................................................................7

2. Case study 1 - Medium-sized public sector employer ........................... 10 2.1 The organisation ......................................................................... 10 2.2 Respondents .............................................................................. 10 2.3 Neurodiversity policies and practices .............................................. 11 2.4 Disclosure .................................................................................. 14 2.5 Awareness of neurodiversity ......................................................... 15 2.6 Benefits from neurodiversity......................................................... 17 2.7 Barriers to the employment of those with neurological conditions....... 18 2.8 Effective practice ........................................................................ 21 2.9 External support for employers ..................................................... 22

3. Case study 2 - Large private sector employer ..................................... 24 3.1 The organisation ......................................................................... 24 3.2 Respondents .............................................................................. 24 3.3 Neurodiversity policies and practices .............................................. 25 3.4 Disclosure .................................................................................. 29 3.5 Awareness of neurodiversity ......................................................... 32 3.6 Benefits of neurodiversity ............................................................. 35 3.7 Barriers to the employment of those with neurological conditions....... 37 3.8 Effective practice ........................................................................ 40 3.9 External support for employers ..................................................... 42

4. Discussion..................................................................................... 43 4.1 Policies and practices ................................................................... 43 4.2 Recruitment ............................................................................... 44 4.3 Performance in work ................................................................... 45 4.4 Progression ................................................................................ 46 4.5 Disclosure .................................................................................. 46 4.6 Awareness of conditions ............................................................... 48 4.7 Support for individuals................................................................. 48 4.8 Support for employers ................................................................. 49 4.9 Benefits of a neurodiverse workforce ............................................. 49

5. Conclusions ................................................................................... 51 5.1 Summary................................................................................... 51 5.2 Limitations and areas for further analysis ....................................... 51

Appendix A - Topic guide for expert interviews ............................................. 52 Appendix B - Topic guides for case studies ................................................... 54

2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors would like to thank the research participants for sharing their expertise and experiences. We would also like to acknowledge the contribution of our colleague, Hilary Metcalf who conducted the majority of the interviews with the experts.

The authors are grateful for the support and guidance given by Acas. Particular thanks are due to Andrew Sutherland who managed the project and was extremely helpful throughout the course of the work.

3

1. MOTIVATION

1.1 Introduction and terminology

This report seeks to identify policies and practices which ensure the integration of people with the following neurological conditions into mainstream employment:

Attention Deficit Disorders Autism Dyslexia Dyspraxia.

The report, in addition, aims to ensure that the benefits of having a ‘neurodiverse’ workforce are fully-realised.

‘Neurodiversity’ refers to the diversity of the human brain and neurocognitive functioning. As such, neurodiversity encompasses individuals who are ‘neurotypical’ and ‘neurodivergent’. Neurodivergent people have one or more of the above (and possibly other) neurological conditions. The conditions share common features, in particular, differences in how people learn and process information. Whilst a neurotypical person’s brain functioning is aligned with the prevailing idea of what is considered ‘normal’ functioning, a neurodivergent individual’s neurocognitive functioning differs from this ‘norm’.1

The neurodiversity paradigm is a specific perspective which holds that neurodiversity is a natural form of human diversity and that all styles of neurocognitive functioning are equally valid. The neurodiversity movement frames minority neurotypes such as autism as natural human variations, which are authentic forms of human diversity and self-expression rather than pathologies.

The present study adopts this broad principle in approaching the subject of neurodiversity specifically within the context of employment. It is based on case studies of two organisations: one large employer based in the private sector and the other a medium-sized public sector employer. The aim is to provide evidence that Acas (the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service) can use to contribute to emerging debates on neurodiversity as an issue that impacts on workplace relations, and to inform the guidance that it produces for employers, including action around neurodiversity in mainstream employment.

A crucial point to be noted is that the neurological conditions under consideration are spectrum conditions which have a range of associated characteristics. These are present in varying degrees and combinations in neurodivergent individuals (and in the general population). Hence, the characteristics displayed by a person with one or more neurological condition will not necessarily match another person with the same condition(s). Moreover, individuals’ handling of the challenging characteristics associated with their condition will differ at points in time.

1 See for more information on the terminology.

4

http://neurocosmopolitanism.com/neurodiversity-some-basic-terms-definitions

Furthermore, there is a propensity for neurodivergent individuals to be stereotyped according to the more well-known characteristics of their condition. For example, not all individuals with autism will be highly numerate; neither will all of those with dyslexia have insurmountable difficulties with functional literacy.

Nevertheless, many of the characteristics of a person’s condition will have a bearing on their management of working life. Therefore, with the above points in mind a description of the neurological conditions of interest to the report, and some of their associated attributes, as given below.

Attention Deficit Disorders

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a condition which affects brain functioning in relation to the ability to control attention, impulses and concentration. ADHD is believed to affect 3 to 9 per cent of school-aged children and young people.2 Until recently it was thought that children ‘outgrew’ ADHD in adolescence. However, research indicates 65 per cent of those diagnosed within childhood continue to experience its effects in adulthood.3 Characteristics experienced in childhood, such as inattention, hyperactivity and impulsiveness can continue into adulthood. Areas of difficulty for adults can include: difficulty with attention to detail and organisational skills, problems focussing or prioritising, starting new tasks before finishing old ones, restlessness, impatience and problems dealing with stress. Some people with the condition may have problems with inattentiveness, but not with hyperactivity or impulsiveness; this form of ADHD is known as attention deficit disorder (ADD).4

Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD)

Autism is a lifelong developmental condition that affects how people perceive the world and interact with others. It is a spectrum condition, albeit all autistic people share certain difficulties, though having autism will impact on people in different ways. Difficulties include social communication and interaction and restricted and repetitive patterns of behaviours or interests. There are a number of autism profiles, for example, childhood autism and Asperger’s syndrome. However, recent and forthcoming changes to diagnostic manuals will result in ASD being the most commonly given diagnosis going forward. It is estimated that there are around 700,000 people with autism in the UK, i.e. more than 1 in 100.5 Notably, only 15 per cent of autistic adults in the UK are in full-time paid employment.6

Dyslexia

Dyslexia is a learning difficulty that can result in problems with reading, writing and spelling. Dyslexic people may find it difficult to process and remember information they see and hear. Dyslexia is one of a group of ‘specific learning difficulties’ that often co-occur with related conditions, such as dyspraxia and ADD. Therefore, individuals may also have problems related to language, motor

2 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (2008). Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: diagnosis and management. Clinical guideline [online]. Available on the World Wide Web: < https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg72 >. 3ADDISS. ADHD: Paying enough attention [online]. Available on the World Wide Web: < http://www.addiss.co.uk/payingenoughattention.pdf>. 4ADDISS Information centre [online]. Available on the World Wide Web: < http://www.addiss.co.uk/allabout.htm>. 5 Autism. What is autism? [online]. Available on the World Wide Web: < http://www.autism.org.uk/about/what-is/asd.aspx> 6 Figure given in the expert interview with the National Autistic Society.

5

http://www.autism.org.uk/about/what-is/asd.aspxhttp://www.addiss.co.uk/allabout.htmhttp://www.addiss.co.uk/payingenoughattention.pdfhttps://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg72

co-ordination, mental calculation, concentration and personal organisation. Dyslexia is a lifelong condition and affects around 10 per cent of the population.7

Dyspraxia

Dyspraxia is a developmental co-ordination disorder (DCD) that affects fine and/or gross motor co-ordination; it may, in addition, affect speech. It is a life lasting condition. DCDs occur in between 6 to 10 per cent of school children in the UK.8 Individuals with dyspraxia may have a range of co-occurring difficulties, such as planning and personal organisation, time management and social and emotional difficulties.9

ADD, autism, dyslexia and dyspraxia are often co-occurring. Also to be noted is that they occur across a range of intellectual abilities.

Whilst the above descriptions detail the challenging attributes associated with these forms of neurodivergence (as these are the characteristics which may have a negative impact at work and for which individuals could need support) it is important to note that there can also be numerous positive attributes associated with neurodivergence. These can include creativity; persistence; loyalty; visual, spatial and lateral thinking, and the ability to hyperfocus, to name a few. Not all neurodivergent people will have outstanding talents, but all will have comparative strengths. Neurodivergent individuals will have their own unique combination of attributes associated with their condition, making it vital for line managers and colleagues to understand them as individuals in order to provide them with person-specific support.

1.2 Research questions

The study sought to answer the following questions:

How can neurodivergent employees best be recruited, trained, supported and retained?

What makes for the most effective management of a neurologically diverse workforce?

Are neurodivergent employees vulnerable to disciplinary action/dismissal by their employers, owing to their condition? Why? Can anything be done to reduce this?

How can the risks of disciplinary action/dismissal be minimised?

Does the issue of disclosure of neurological conditions raise any problems?

How can staff awareness of neurodiversity be improved and how can employers become ‘disability confident’ with regard to neurological conditions?

7 Dyslexia and specific difficulties: overview [online]. Available on the World Wide Web: < http://www.bdadyslexia.org.uk/dyslexic/dyslexia-and-specific-difficulties-overview#What is Dyslexia>; Definitions [online]. Available on the World Wide Web: < http://www.bdadyslexia.org.uk/dyslexic/definitions>. 8 Prevalence and impact [online]. Available on the World Wide Web: < http://www.hdcd.org.uk/hdcd_guidance_notes/prevalence_3.php>. 9 What is dyspraxia [online]. Available on the World Wide Web: < https://dyspraxiafoundation.org.uk/about-dyspraxia/>.

6

https://dyspraxiafoundation.org.uk/about-dyspraxiahttp://www.hdcd.org.uk/hdcd_guidance_notes/prevalence_3.phphttp://www.bdadyslexia.org.uk/dyslexic/definitionshttp://www.bdadyslexia.org.uk/dyslexic/dyslexia-and-specific-difficulties-overview#What

What are the potential benefits to employers of attracting and maintaining a neurodiverse workforce (and the risks of failing to do so)?

Where can employers go for help and assistance?

These questions were addressed by first reviewing background information on neurodiversity and interviewing experts on the topic of neurodiversity at work; and secondly conducting two case studies of organisations whose workforces are neurodiverse, that is to say they employ neurodivergent as well as neurotypical staff. The expert interviews and review of background evidence had two main aims:

to identify the issues affecting employers and employees in relation to neurological conditions to inform the development of topic guides for the case studies;

to identify suitable case study organisations.

The case studies consisted of interviews with senior human resources managers and/or those able to give an overview of diversity policies at each organisation, one or more line managers of employees with neurological conditions and one or more employees with a neurological condition. In some cases managers were themselves neurodivergent.

1.3 The conduct of fieldwork

1.3.1 Review of background information and expert interviews

The review of background information on neurodiversity and interviews with experts were completed over the period from August 2015 to January 2016. Interviews were carried out with representatives of the following organisations:

Attention Deficit Disorder Information and Support Service (ADDISS), British Dyslexia Association, Dyspraxia Foundation, National Autistic Society.

In addition to this, two experts working for consultancies which work with employees with neurological conditions (Key 4 Learning and Genius Within) were interviewed.

The expert interviewees made a number of points in common. First, they felt that there was a need for increased awareness of neurodivergence and its impact in employment. This was even the case for conditions where there had been a longer history of awareness such as dyslexia. Experts explained that knowledge could be limited to a few more well-known attributes associated with the conditions, leading to incorrect expectations and stereotypes. A lack of awareness could be more problematic if the individual had not disclosed their condition as behaviours could be misconstrued, for example as laziness, being difficult or not having the skills to do the job. Increased awareness by line managers and colleagues could prevent problems developing and escalating, and depending on the relationship could prompt conversations about support, and if appropriate about getting diagnosed. However, some experts highlighted that awareness and subsequent support were not reliant on an official diagnosis, and

7

in fact in some cases a diagnosis would be unnecessary and could be emotionally difficult for the individual.

The experts drew attention to the low-esteem experienced by many neurodivergent individuals, who may have had numerous negative experiences during their education and employment history. Therefore, in addition to being aware of the challenges associated with their employees’ conditions employers need to consider the emotional impact of being neurodivergent and its effect on individuals’ self-esteem. For example, employers should bear in mind that neurodivergent individuals’ reluctance to progress may stem from their lack of self-belief. Similarly, when discussing performance it is important to highlight successes as well as areas for improvement.

The expert interviewees discussed the importance of good communications, for example, being clear in what is expected when allocating tasks. Additionally, having an open and supportive dialogue with neurodivergent colleagues was felt to be important, particularly when discussing performance issues. However, it was stated that discussions with colleagues with autism would require neurotypical individuals to discard their norms of social interaction; they would need to be considerably more direct and be prepared to take the lead in conversations. When communicating with those with ADD, colleagues should consider that they could be hypersensitive to auditory stimuli. Additionally, people with ADD may need instructions repeated several times.

Expert interviewees emphasised the need to foster a positive environment where acceptance and tolerance of diversity are the norm. Some experts were eager to stress that there has been a trend in education and employment to develop and value generalists with a range of skills. This could result in a lower appreciation of people with specialist skills or whose aptitude, though potentially high, may be limited to a smaller range of capabilities. The focus on generalists was particularly problematic for neurodivergent individuals in recruitment and progression. As one solution, experts discussed the need for employers to review whether activities, either in the selection process or the job, were necessary. For example, employers should think whether assessment tests during recruitment accurately reflect the work environment in terms of content and the time allowed to complete the tests.

All the experts discussed the merits of having a neurodiverse workforce. They discussed the many positive attributes often associated with neurological conditions, such as creativity, the ability to think laterally, to develop highly specialised skills and to consistently perform tasks once mastered. The also discussed other positive traits often found in this group, such as loyalty and persistence.

1.3.2 Identifying the case studies

Two potential case study organisations were identified as a result of the expert interviews and other research, a Midlands-based college of further education (FE) and a large private sector employer in the finance industry. Both organisations consented to take part in the research and no other organisations were approached.

The FE college was considered suitable as it was known to employ a number of staff with different neurological conditions, in addition to working with students with such conditions. The large private sector employer was mentioned by a

8

number of the expert interviewees as having a well-established network for employees with dyslexia. Further enquiries prior to fieldwork suggested that the organisation also employed staff with other neurological conditions. It was of interest as a large private sector employer, with a greater emphasis on profitability than the public sector employer.

1.3.3 Case study fieldwork

Three separate topic guides were devised for each of the case study respondents (HR manager, line manager and employee) and revised in response to comments from Acas. These are included in the appendix to this report, as is the topic guide for the expert interviews. Interviews were semi-structured and those with HR managers lasted between around 40 minutes and an hour and a quarter, depending on the breadth of coverage of their role. Interviews with other respondents lasted around 30 minutes.

The FE college case study visit took place on 18 February 2016 and interviews conducted with a total of four members of staff, the HR manager, two line managers and one other employee. Three had a neurological condition, two of them managers. All interviews were face-to-face.

The visit to the large private sector employer took place on 22 April 2016. Five members of staff were interviewed face-to-face on the day. Prior to this, two members of staff were interviewed by telephone, and three were interviewed by telephone following the case study visit. It was necessary to interview a larger number of people than was the case for the FE college as responsibility for different aspects of the HR function were split across different staff, due to the size of the business. Also, the intention was to interview staff working in different divisions of the business and at different levels of seniority. Interviewees consisted of three HR managers, one line manager and six other members of staff.10 All six employees had a neurological condition.

The following two chapters describe the main findings from the two case studies and similarities and differences between the two workplaces are then discussed in detail in Chapter 4, alongside findings from the expert interviews and review of background material. The final chapter summarises the main findings across the two case studies and highlights the limitations of the analysis, as well as any ways in which the current research could usefully be extended.

10 Some of these members of staff were also line managers, so they were asked whether they managed others with neurological conditions, and if so, about this experience.

9

http:staff.10

2. CASE STUDY 1 - MEDIUM-SIZED PUBLIC SECTOR EMPLOYER

2.1 The organisation

The first case study was of an FE college, located in the Midlands. It had a long history as a college for visually impaired students, but in the past 20 years had started to take on students with a wider range of conditions. As the student intake changed to include those with a broader range of physical disabilities and neurological conditions, diversity amongst staff had also increased.

The college employed a little over 300 staff in total, most of whom were located at a single site. However a small number worked within three small enterprises in other locations: a gardening centre; a coffee shop and a cycle shop. These enterprises were set up with the aim of giving students work experience; generating revenue for the college and to engage in community outreach. Five staff were known to have severe dyslexia which meant that they struggled with written work, but a further 15 to 20 had dyslexia which had a lower level of impact on their work, due to their role and the less severe nature of their condition. Around 15 staff were thought to have dyspraxia and three had been diagnosed with autism. About 10 employees had ADD. Because of the co-occurence of some of the conditions, around 40 staff in total were thought to have one or more neurological conditions.

2.2 Respondents

Case study respondents included an HR manager (known as [HR] throughout) who had been with the employer for two years, two line managers, one of whom had worked for the organisation for 18 years [LM1] and the other for five years [LM2], and an employee who had been working at the college for six months [E]. Three of the four had neurological conditions; one having been diagnosed with dyslexia at the age of nine and one at the age of 25. In the final case, the respondent had received a diagnosis of autism whilst they were studying at college.

The HR manager was a generalist and so carried out a wide range of HR tasks, including recruitment and selection, overseeing the probationary period, dealing with performance problems, including disciplinary hearings, stress management and organising training and development. One of the two line managers was responsible for managing an on-site gym. This was a profit-making enterprise, similar to the three off-site enterprises previously mentioned. He was also responsible for managing lettings for a sports hall. He line managed four full-time and three part-time staff, as well as six volunteers and causal workers. This included two staff who had been diagnosed with autism, but were described as ‘high-functioning’ [LM1]. The second line manager was a student support manager who was responsible for managing a team of nine mentors who worked with students. His team supported students with emotional and behavioural issues and other disability-related needs and he also worked with two external psychologists. Two of the staff members that he line-managed were dyslexic. The final interviewee was a tutor, responsible for planning and delivering lessons to groups of students.

10

The fact that staff awareness of neurological conditions was high due to working with students with a range of conditions meant that all respondents with a neurological condition themselves had disclosed this from an early stage with the employer. In two cases disclosure had taken place prior to interview, and in the other case disclosure had occurred after receiving the job offer. Disclosure is discussed in further detail in section 2.4.

2.3 Neurodiversity policies and practices

The college did not have a specific written policy on neurodiversity, but neurological conditions were covered under a wider policy on disability. Thought had been given to how to ensure that employment practices did not disadvantage neurodivergent staff. The ways in which practices accommodated employees with neurological conditions are described in the following sections.

2.3.1 Recruitment practices

It was necessary for the college to have a standardised recruitment process involving the completion of application forms to meet safeguarding requirements. This was done online so that applicants had access to spell and grammar checking software. As well as reducing the barriers for those with dyslexia, this also accommodated autistic applicants who found computer-based communication easier.

Candidates were asked to declare any disabilities or neurological conditions as part of their application, but this information was only seen by the HR department and not the managers involved in shortlisting candidates for interview. This information was used to identify a suitable room for the interview (where candidates had a physical disability), as well as any adaptations which were needed in the interview process. Where there was a written test, candidates who declared that they were dyslexic at the outset were given extra time to complete the task.

Applicants were invited to interview by e-mail, as this was thought to aid dyslexic applicants who may have memory problems. This was also considered more suitable for those with autism, who might find it difficult to receive an unplanned telephone call. However, the e-mail invited applicants to ring if they had any queries prior to the interview and if they had already declared their condition by this stage they were asked to call to discuss whether they required any support in the interview process.

The interview format and process was explained to candidates in advance so that they knew what to expect before the start of the interview. It was important for candidates with autism in particular to be given detailed information on the precise format of the interview. For example, whilst the respondent with autism described the interview process as ‘good’, she did say that she was slightly thrown by the fact that she had been asked to plan a lesson for six students, but was then asked to deliver this to the interview panel, rather than to a class, as she was expecting.

If the applicant had declared a neurological condition prior to interview, the college sought to accommodate any requests for support, provided they did not

11

disadvantage other candidates.11 Candidates were also allowed to take notes into the interview.

2.3.2 Following interview

If a candidate who had declared a neurological condition was offered a job, they were then invited to discuss any support needs when they came in to complete their Disclosure and Baring Service (DBS) form. The discussion about their support requirements was intentionally left until after they had received the job offer because it was felt that new recruits would be more willing to talk about their needs at this stage. This conversation took place well in advance of their first day of work however, to ensure that it was possible to put the required support in place before the new recruit started work. Line managers would be involved in discussions if necessary.

2.3.3 Induction

The coverage of the induction training was standard, but the way in which the content was conveyed to new starters was adapted to suit their needs. Longer sessions were broken down into shorter interactive sessions, with new recruits discussing information and making notes which were reviewed later, or they were given background reading prior to a short briefing so that the content could then be discussed. Disability awareness training formed part of the induction. Respondents also noted that the availability of support, if required, was emphasised during this period and that this was reassuring.

2.3.4 Training

Staff were sent a training calendar on a regular basis, so that they had plenty of prior notice of what was coming up. It was also important to provide information on the venue in advance for those with autism, as changes to room layout and background noise could be a distraction. Advanced information on subjects for discussion and written notes to refer to afterwards ensured that staff with autism were able to benefit fully from the training received.

The paperwork that accompanied training was designed to be accessible to all participants – for example, by using coloured and larger font sizes for dyslexic employees. Staff were given copies of slides in advance and were read out, as those with autism had difficulties reading and listening at the same time. Plenty of time was allowed for staff to ask questions ‘as opposed to whizzing through stuff’ [E]. The respondent with autism commented that ‘what I've noticed mainly is just it's exactly the same as how you treat the students in that you make sure that everybody's following and stuff. Whereas other places they get it with the students but with the staff you're supposed to be perfect’ [E].

11 Requests to see the interview questions in advance were not granted, for example. However, candidates were given an overview of the topics that would be covered in the interview.

12

http:candidates.11

2.3.5 Performance management

It was noted that staff with neurological conditions often suffered from low self-esteem due to past treatment as a result of their condition. A number of respondents mentioned that the problems that they experienced due to their neurodivergence had resulted in mental health problems and there was a strong desire amongst some to take action to ensure that others avoided similar difficulties. As a result it was necessary to handle performance issues with particular sensitivity. It was important for line managers to be aware that problems with performance may have arisen because the member of staff was reluctant to discuss the impact of their condition on their work and the need for additional support. In these cases it was important for the line manager to offer support, rather than relying on the employee to say what they needed. However, even in these cases, it was necessary to have a two-way discussion of what the employee might find helpful. For example, the line manager might suggest ways of working that other staff with the same condition had found helpful and ask the employee whether they felt that the same approach might work for them. Of course, the ability of the line manager to do this might vary depending on their past experience of working with other staff with neurological conditions.

Where adaptations were required to assist an employee in doing their job, the college sought to implement these in stages so that they could monitor its impact. For example, one member of staff who had had an Access to Work12 assessment requested training which the college provided. There had been other suggestions for this person; however, the college had a practice of assessing existing adaptations for a period of time before they provided more. In part they wanted to ensure that any changes had the desired effect and to identify areas where any further support was necessary; this was felt to be important in tailoring the support to the individual.

2.3.6 Retention

Making the employee feel like a full member of the workforce, with the same opportunities as other staff was seen as vital to ensuring retention. This included ensuring that they were offered ongoing support for their condition, through any changes in their job that occurred over time. One respondent noted that there was a danger that ‘support is provided early on...and then it drifts off as time goes on’ [LM2]. Giving employees the opportunity to discuss any concerns as they arose was important. Initially discussions might largely take place between the HR department and the new recruit, but as the employee became more established in their job, the line manager might assume greater responsibility for discussions over support needs. This process had been put in place as initially employees and line managers would not have established a relationship. Once they had done so there was less HR involvement, although HR staff did still attend appraisals in a support role.

12 Access to Work is a publicly funded service from Jobcentre Plus aimed at helping those with a ‘disability or long term health condition’ that requires ‘an aid, adaptation or financial or human support to do a job’. (Department for Work & Pensions, 2016. Access to Work: factsheet for customers [online]. Available from World Wide Web: < https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/access-to-work-factsheet/access-to-work-factsheet-for-customers>)

13

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/access-to-work-factsheet/access-to-work

2.4 Disclosure

The college formally monitored the number of people with different types of neurological condition. Every two years all staff were asked to reconfirm their details and so were given the opportunity to disclose a condition at this point. This was done in recognition of the fact that some staff may have been wary of disclosing a neurological condition or other disability when they first started working for the college. At least some staff were known to have not disclosed their condition until later in their employment. Where an employee did disclose a neurological condition, they were asked whether they would like any support.

There were a number of reasons why an employee might chose not to disclose that they had a neurological condition. Firstly, there was a desire to be called for interview based on merit, rather than because of the legal requirement for employers to interview all suitably qualified candidates with a disability. Secondly, the willingness to disclose depended on the perceived openness of the employer towards those with neurological conditions and the fear that disclosure might ‘go against them’ [LM2]. Some respondents reported that whilst they had declared their condition at an early stage in their current job, this had not been the case with previous employers because of a fear of the likely consequences. Finally, in some cases employees failed to disclose their condition at the outset because they were not aware of it themselves.

Disclosure once someone was offered a job was seen as vital to minimise the risk of avoidable performance management issues arising. Job roles could often be adjusted to reduce the need for the individual to carry out tasks that were more difficult for them, due to their neurological condition, or they could often be provided with adaptations which helped them to perform particular tasks, such as working on some tasks as part of a team, rather than on their own. Where disclosure did not occur, this could create difficulties for the employee, as much as for the organisation. For example, one interviewee reported that a member of staff with dyslexia had initially struggled with her workload because of the difficulties that she faced in producing written work. Her dyslexia only came to light when she admitted that she was finding the amount of work difficult during the course of an appraisal. The problems arose partly because of the strain that producing written work caused, due to her dyslexia and partly because her perception of the standard of work required was higher than it actually needed to be. As a result of her discussion with her line manager, she was formally diagnosed with dyslexia. Her line manager questioned whether this would have been the case in a less supportive workplace where awareness of neurological conditions was lower.

In a second case, an employee who had not disclosed their condition on starting a previous job had initially received good feedback on her performance. On declaring her condition, she started to receive criticism and she felt that this may have been because they were concerned that they would be expected to make adjustments. In another case, she had disclosed her condition in confidence, but this information was then passed on to the safeguarding team, the implication being that her condition might potentially put students at risk. Rather than disclosure being used to ensure that the employee had the support they needed to do their job well, in some cases it was used to question their competence and suitability for the job.

Whilst in some cases respondents reported that information on their condition had been communicated to others without their permission in past jobs, in other instances employees expected information to be shared more widely than in fact

14

was the case. This could create difficulties where the employee expected others to be aware of their condition, when in fact they had not been notified. This highlighted the need to have a clear procedure for staff to disclose their condition and clarity around whether they were willing for this information to be passed on to colleagues and for this to be discussed explicitly. The college asked employees whether they consented to this information being shared more widely before discussing their condition with other staff, but did encourage employees to disclose to colleagues where they felt comfortable to do so. Although disclosure to colleagues in general could reduce work pressures where they were understanding, it was seen as less important in an environment in which differences between individuals were acknowledged and accepted. One respondent commented that it was important generally for employers to treat employees as individuals and to offer them flexibility and support where needed, rather than expecting them to conform to a rigid pattern of behaviour. This had the added advantage of ensuring that those who had not been diagnosed with a neurological condition were able to contribute to the workplace. To her it was important ‘to support that person as an individual, you know, rather than needing a label for it’ because ‘even if you've not got a disability, people work in different ways so just understanding your individual people, your workforce, and how they work best surely is just what you should do anyway?’ [E].

2.5 Awareness of neurodiversity

The general level of awareness of neurodiversity within the workplace was thought to be high, given that staff worked with students with a range of conditions. However, some respondents noted that staff may be less aware of neurodiversity amongst their colleagues. This was partly due to the fact that they did not expect their colleagues to have the same conditions as the students and also because it was up to individuals to decide whether they wished to disclose a neurological condition to their colleagues. Therefore, even some of those directly working alongside neurodivergent colleagues may not be aware that this was the case. It was also noted that staff were perhaps less aware of some of the practicalities of interacting with colleagues with autism, compared to their knowledge of dyslexia and dyspraxia. There were differences between teaching and support staff, with the former being more aware of autism due their interaction with students. Additionally, whilst staff were provided with training on autism, it was geared towards interactions with students rather than their working relations with colleagues. Finally, there was a greater incidence of staff with dyslexia or dyspraxia in comparison to ADD and autism, which may have also contributed to lower levels of understanding of autism as cited by the interviewee. Furthermore, students sometimes had quite a profound level of disability, which meant that staff were less able to recognise the less severe, more ‘hidden’ form of impairment experienced by some of their colleagues, because the symptoms were much less obvious. Whilst staff were aware of the well-known impact of dyslexia on written communications, they were less aware of the potential strain from having to complete a lot of written work, or differences with neurodivergent staff in terms of organisation and problem-solving.

Even when employees disclosed their condition and it was known to all parties, difficulties could still arise between members of staff where they were less able to adjust to the needs of others due to their neurological conditions. Situations where two staff with neurological conditions worked alongside each other needed careful management. In one such case, the college had spoken to both parties

15

and sought their consent to disclose their condition to the other party so that they could then offer them both support in working together.

In most cases employees were thought to be good at recognising each other’s needs and adapting to accommodate each other. Having leadership that was committed to having diversity, in terms of disability or neurodivergence, amongst its staff, was also identified as important in creating a supportive environment. Nevertheless, the fact that autistic staff could ‘sometimes have very channelled avenues of conversation or take things literally’ [LM1] could cause frictions at times, with the potential for other staff or members of the public to take offence or get bored. For example, one employee with autism had a favourite topic which they would talk about for extended periods of time without realising that other people were not interested. A potentially more serious example was given by the employee, who discussed difficulties she had had with another member of staff who had a disability. After checking that both individuals were happy to disclose their neurodivergence and disability, the college explained to each person the other’s needs and characteristics. The employee felt that this had been useful and that the situation had been handled well. More generally, (neurotypical) colleagues were sometimes thought to take the attitude that someone with a neurological condition was ‘in the wrong job’ because ‘they haven’t got the right skill set for the job they’re being asked to do’ [LM2]; though in some of these cases individuals would not know of their colleagues’ neurodivergence. Misunderstandings over behaviour could result in disciplinary action and conflict at work; speaking with regard to prior experience of other workplaces, the respondent with autism commented that ‘whilst obviously the autistic spectrum is seen as being a lack of flexibility, actually it's the lack of flexibility that's shown to people on the spectrum that causes the problems’ [E]. The fact that staff were used to supporting students was thought to lessen problems at the college in this regard, but the respondent with autism felt that there should be greater employment protection for those with neurological conditions because in most cases they just ended up leaving their job if they encountered problems.

The gym manager noted that whilst some employees had ‘slightly shorter fuses with other staff’ and would complain to him, the fact that they also worked with students with neurological conditions and had received autism training meant that this was not generally a problem. It was more of an issue where autistic staff came into contact with members of the public though, as described above, in relation to the employee who discussed their favourite topic at length with gym members. Additionally, this individual would often be happy to sit at the reception desk but at other times did not feel able to cope with the task and would ask to leave whilst manning the desk. In these situations the gym manager was flexible and gave the responsibility to another employee. However, this did mean that the manager had to change employees’ tasks at short notice.

As well as providing disability awareness training as part of the induction and at other times, the college took action to seek to raise awareness of neurological conditions amongst staff by encouraging employees who had a condition themselves to give awareness training. Making staff aware that they had a colleague with a particular condition to highlight the fact that this was not always obvious was an important part of this as in some cases problems arose when an otherwise able member of staff was unable to carry out particular activities. The respondent with autism felt that the fact that her condition was not visible and that she came ‘across as fairly intelligent, fairly articulate and I'm in a job that's not just stacking shelves’ meant that there was a risk that a less understanding employer, or colleagues, would just see her as ‘being difficult’ and refusing to conform [E]. Even with disclosure, difficulties could arise due to a lack of

16

understanding of how her condition affected her behaviour. The awareness training gave staff the opportunity to talk about how their condition affected them as an individual and what other staff could do to help, as opposed to talking more generally about the condition, which may not necessarily apply to those with the condition within the workplace.

Line managers were thought to have a greater level of awareness of neurological conditions from working alongside neurodivergent staff. However, there was a learning process when they started managing employees with particular conditions and built up their confidence in how to offer support. Both of the line managers interviewed had received training in working with disabled people and the gym manager said that he had also completed a certified course on autism. The student support manager reported that a dyslexia specialist ran awareness sessions on the conditions, which were mainly aimed at teachers, but were also relevant to other staff. One of the two line managers felt that training on different learning styles and personality types would be useful in raising awareness of diversity amongst employees more generally.

2.6 Benefits from neurodiversity

One of the main benefits of employing staff with a range of neurological conditions for the college was that it provided role models for students. Students could see that ‘people who are like them’ were able to make a contribution to the workplace and to occupy responsible positions [HR]. In addition to this, students were said to benefit from being taught by staff who were able to explain things in a way that made sense to them, because teacher and student had the same neurotype.

Aside from the value of having a neurologically diverse workforce for reasons which were specific to the nature of this particular workplace, it was noted that there were benefits that would apply more generally to all workplaces from having people with ‘a different mind-set’ who ‘look at things in a different way’ [HR]. It was seen as important to have staff who challenged established ways of thinking and brought a different perspective to the workplace. Employees with dyslexia were considered to be particularly strong in terms of coming up with ideas for problem-solving and planning. If their strengths in certain areas were recognised and channelled, they could make a valuable contribution. Autistic staff were described as ‘good at attention to detail’, honest and dedicated to their job [E].

The gym manager reported that all of the staff that they had employed with neurological conditions were ‘exceptionally good members of staff’. Whilst it was necessary to give them a narrow brief which suited their skillset, the college tended to ‘get value added in that’ [LM1]. However, he felt that there was greater potential to employ autistic staff to their strengths. His view was that ‘We tend to kind of bland people out of it now’, by focusing on support related to everyday activities and assimilation into a neurotypical environment. He believed this led other more specialised skills, where individuals have a comparative advantage, being neglected. The manager gave the example of a student who is very interested in information technology (IT) but has difficulties presenting himself. The manager felt that instead of concentrating on his interpersonal skills the focus should be on developing his IT skills to a high level and then providing him with support so that he could use these skills in a work environment. The manager also described this in relation to other students, ‘a lot of autistic students with fantastic memories and visual acuity and photographic memories

17

who love spotting things and... why are these guys not working on...port scanners and data entry for the Police...they might not be able to cope in the work place without support, but give them support...then use that skill and that person would be very happy’ [LM1].

Some respondents felt that organisational loyalty was a common characteristic of neurodivergent employees. The fact that some staff had previously struggled to find an understanding employer that supported them with their condition and allowed them to fulfil their potential was likely to have contributed to this, rather than this being due to their condition per se. However, in the case of autism, it was felt that the intrinsic value attached to having an established routine at work also played a part.

2.7 Barriers to the employment of those with neurological conditions

Respondents described some of the difficulties that arose in the workplace for those with neurological conditions and for their colleagues. Awareness of autism in society as a whole was thought to be low, so that many people would have little understanding of the contribution that an employee with autism might be able to make. More generally, stereotypes concerning what particular conditions entailed were limiting for respondents, as whilst they might be true of some people with the condition, not everyone is affected. There was also felt to be a general lack of awareness about how challenging effects associated with particular conditions could be minimised and accommodated with the right support. For example, some respondents felt that employers often assumed that employees with dyslexia would struggle with paperwork, whereas in reality relatively small adaptations could avoid any potential problems arising.

Employees with autism were said to prefer e-mail communication to telephone calls and the employee who was interviewed explained how she liked recipients to acknowledge receipt of her e-mails even if they had no other response to make, as not receiving a reply made her feel anxious. One line manager described how the impact of an individual’s autism on their capacity to undertake work could vary from day-to-day, so that a task that was achievable one day might be impossible the next. A set-back could trigger anxiety, making it harder to overcome a problem. Difficulties could also arise because the employee was not always able to express their feelings and needed clear instructions, rather than being expected to be proactive. Because of this it was important to ensure that communications were clear and no-one was asked to do anything that might result in overload.

The respondent with autism also described how her role as a teacher could be stressful, due to the fact that it was sometimes necessary to adapt to last-minute changes, or situations that she had not been prepared for. This was exhausting and in past jobs where the support had been lacking, this had resulted in absences due to anxiety. A period working as a supply teacher had caused particular problems due to the lack of advance information and uncertainty over whether she would be working from one day to the next. To some extent, this was due to the nature of the job, but was also down to the employer not providing her with information that was available to them in advance, such as which room she would be working in. However, it was not clear if the employer was aware of her autism.

The fact that it was not possible to place a high level of reliance on all autistic employees working alone meant that it was necessary to ensure that they were

18

deployed in a way that made optimum use of their skills, rather than expecting them to perform all aspects of the job. In the absence of pressure, it was possible for an autistic employee ‘to shine and relax and do more than you expect of him, but when you put pressure on him he withers’ [LM1]. The difficulty in being able to rely completely on an autistic employee in respect of certain tasks had implications for other staff, who were potentially called upon to fill in for them at short notice if it became apparent that the autistic member of staff would not be able to complete a task.

As a public sector college with wider aims than the purely financial, the gym manager saw an intrinsic value in employing autistic staff, but he noted that in a more commercial environment it would be unlikely that an employer would take on someone who had to declare themselves that they would not be able to take on all aspects of a role. This was particularly the case given the rigors of job interviews and the high level of competition for jobs. He described how ‘the last time we interviewed here, even quite a low paid job we had some major applicants, we had somebody with Masters Degrees and for a minimum wage job’. In this context he felt that many employers would be unlikely to recruit an autistic employee, because whilst college staff had sufficient experience of autism to know what challenges to expect, employers who had no previous experience of employing autistic staff ‘might need some serious training in it’ [LM1]. The respondent with autism also noted that whilst the college had been very supportive, she had previously worked for other FE colleges which had students with special needs who had not been supportive of staff members with neurological conditions.

Dyslexia was associated with memory problems and some problems communicating ideas to others as well as difficulties with written communications and dyscalculia. As previously mentioned, where the condition went undiagnosed, employees could find it necessary to spend a lot of time trying to carry out tasks to the required standard, placing them under undue stress and making it difficult for them to fulfil their potential. They could also find it difficult to explain ideas to others in a succinct way that could be clearly understood by others. A diagnosis followed by support with coping techniques, such as association and visual prompts, enabled staff to reduce the negative effects of the condition. For example, an interviewee discussed thinking about the location where an event took place as a trigger to remembering other information. The same person had difficulties remembering passwords or at times was confused with telephone numbers. They dealt with this by knowing the sequence they had to type on the keyboard rather than knowing exact numbers or passwords.

A failure to disclose could cause problems during the interview as some neurological conditions are associated with anxiety. In some cases autistic candidates ‘froze’ during the interview, but as they had not declared their condition, it was difficult to take this into account. The gym manager felt that in this case ‘it’s in their best interests to declare it because it might go against them ... if they don’t perform so well in the interview process’ [LM1]. This could also apply to applicants with dyslexia, as one respondent reported that ‘sometimes the dyslexia gets worse if you’re nervous so that can affect things at an interview’ [LM2]. The form-filling that was required in the early stages of a new job could also be a barrier for new recruits with dyslexia who did not disclose their condition.

One of the line managers noted that as some of their staff had previously been students at the college, the employer already had a good idea of their capabilities and the adaptations that would be required before they were taken on as an

19

employee. However, this would not be the case for another employer and it may be difficult for some applicants to demonstrate their potential during interview, due to the nature of their condition. As the participant spoke from experience he only referred to applicants with dyslexia or autism.

It was noted that the barriers to employment for those with certain types of neurological conditions varied depending on the workplace and job role. It was felt that in some industries there would be a lack of understanding of particular conditions. The severity of the symptoms would dictate whether an employee would be able to fit in where the employer was less accommodating. The respondent with autism reported that in the past when she had explained that she found something difficult ‘the response is well you need to learn to do it, rather than what can we change so that it's not difficult’ [E]. This was a serious barrier to continuing employment. The potential for sensory overload for some of those with neurological conditions could also be a barrier to employment in particular fields, but it was thought important not to overgeneralise about this, as there was huge diversity even within those with a particular condition.

It was also thought that some employers had an expectation that adjustments would be costly and the process of establishing what adaptations were needed might be time-consuming. The HR manager felt that some employers would be reluctant to buy equipment for a new employee when they did not know how long they might stay with the firm. However, in practice, the adaptations required might be fairly minimal. Individuals discussed support such as: being informed of changes to timetables, rooms and room layouts in advance; colleagues being willing to adapt communication to the neurodivergent person’s preference, and; providing feedback in bullet points rather than in paragraph form. Adaptations coupled with an openness to accommodating neurodivergent individuals’ requests without assuming that they were being difficult or ‘picky’ were appreciated by individuals. For example, the employee discussed how being given a room as base to work from which was not shared with others, as would have normally been the case, as positive action by the college. She also mentioned that the college had quickly fixed a flickering light on her request as she is light sensitive. Although, she believed that they would have mended the light regardless of her request, she appreciated their quick response and, importantly, felt confident in making requests.

With the right support, job role and adaptations, employees with neurological conditions were able to progress, but it was recognised that this was partly dependent on the nature and severity of the condition. For example, it was noted that employees with ADD may struggle with more senior desk-based roles as they may not like the additional requirement for office-based tasks in these roles. However, the interviewee highlighted that it was important to clarify whether individuals felt prohibited to apply for promotion due to their neurodivergent characteristics or because of their lack of self-belief. It was felt that there was an element of self-selection in this. In particular, employees with autism were said to value stability and so in general would not welcome the change to their routine that a promotion would entail. In other cases, autistic employees were able to benefit from the training that they received, but it was thought that some individuals might find it more difficult to participate in certified or accredited training, or to pass exams. Employees with dyslexia had successfully managed to progress in the workplace, but one respondent noted that progression depended on having the right support. He was conscious that his condition meant that a further promotion would mean ‘lot more things I’d need support with, which probably does tend to stop me wanting to move forward’ [LM2]. In his view, he probably would have progressed quicker if he did not have dyslexia. It was noted

20

that in some workplaces employees with neurological conditions may feel unable to apply for a promotion for fear that their condition would become obvious to colleagues.

2.8 Effective practice

Where employees did disclose that they had a neurological condition, the success of any support put in place depended on it being carefully tailored to the needs of the individual. This involved having a detailed discussion about support needs and creating an environment in which employees felt able to discuss any further issues as they arose. Where an employee received a negative response to any requests for help, they were less likely to feel able to raise any further problems and so this could cause difficulties to escalate.

It was important for the employer and fellow employees to be open to doing things differently and making the required adjustments. The respondent with autism commented that ‘I've worked places before where it's pretty much you do the job however everybody else does the job and if you need adjustments it's not going to happen’ [E]. Whilst she had access to an external specialist adviser who was able to work with the college to ensure that she had the support that she needed to do her job, she mentioned that mentors were also available at the workplace to fulfil a similar role for other staff. Of the external support discussed, the employee had a support worker from a charity which specialises in autism; she was assigned the support worker whilst seeking employment. Another member of staff had a support worker who facilitated an Access to Work assessment, thus aiding the individual in getting a package of support.

Giving careful thought to whether the job role was suitable given the strengths and weaknesses of the employee was vital to ensure that they were able to perform well. One of the line managers noted that it was important to consider the likelihood that the employee could fulfil a role with the right training, or whether, even with training ‘it’s going to be really hard for the person to achieve that’ [LM2].

Proof reading was important where an employee had dyslexia. Having an established process of checking communications prior to circulation as part of normal quality assurance meant that this could be seen as standard good practice, rather than an adaptation which was brought in specifically because some employees were dyslexic. Being clear about the required standard of work was also important, as employees who struggled with certain tasks were sometimes trying to achieve higher standards than were in fact needed. One respondent found preparing written records of meetings, such as appraisals, difficult, but overcame this by recording them so that administrative support staff could type up notes. It was also important for those working alongside staff with dyslexia to ensure that there was a clear understanding between both parties about what had been agreed. This was particularly the case where both staff had dyslexia.

Greater standardisation of working practices over time was thought to have made it easier to accommodate autistic employees in the workplace. Many job tasks were now defined in writing and scheduled for particular times, both for health and safety reasons and in an effort to become a more corporate environment which maintained consistent standards. This was thought to assist autistic employees who benefited from clear instructions and having a written rota of tasks that they could tick off as they were completed. As the gym manager put it

21

‘they’re eliminating a lot of the grey areas’ [LM1]. The challenge of having a list of jobs to complete also helped them to complete tasks more quickly. Tasks such as putting up posters were greatly simplified by having set places where these should go, as this removed the anxiety associated with choosing a suitable location. By contrast, neurotypical employees tended to enjoy greater job discretion and wanted to have greater freedom to think for themselves and organise their own time. The gym manager explained that whilst the set-up costs of ensuring that tasks were clearly prescribed were high, it had benefits for the gym as a whole as it meant that ‘everyone works in the same way’ [LM1]. With an established routine and clarity over what was expected and advanced notice of any changes, an autistic employee could make a valuable contribution to the workplace.

Providing written feedback as a bullet point list, rather than paragraphs of text and giving employees a written record of conversations was helpful for those with autism, who could have difficulty remembering verbal feedback. As previously mentioned, e-mail based communications and written training materials were useful for a similar reason. The respondent with autism was allowed to give notice by e-mail rather than telephone when she was off-sick and was given advanced notice of any timetable or room changes, including changes to room layout. She had also been allocated a dedicated classroom so that she could have a familiar base. Flickering lights had initially caused her problems, so as these needed to be replaced anyway, they consulted her over suitable replacements.

Direct communication with employees over the impact of their condition and their support needs was identified as important in ensuring that any potential problems were overcome. Shying away from the topic gave the impression that it was something to be ashamed of, rather than ‘part of who they are’ [HR]. The respondent with autism also commented that it was important to treat employees as adults and able to have an input into what they needed to help them to function effectively in their role, rather than saying ‘we're going to do this because we understand your condition’ [E].

Where someone did not disclose their condition at the outset and it later created difficulties, it was important to handle enquiries about whether they already had a diagnosis in a sensitive way and with a degree of informality so that the employee felt able to be open about the problems that they were experiencing.

Having a supportive work environment was thought to increase the likelihood that an employee with a neurological condition applied for a promotion as this provided reassurance that the employer would consider them on their merits, rather than making a judgement based on myths about their condition. Respondents felt that the opportunities for progression for neurodivergent staff were good within the college because ‘they don't see it as a thing that they're having to do for you and begrudging you’ [E].

2.9 External support for employers

The college had made use of Access to Work. There was support for it in principle, but there was dissatisfaction with how it worked in practice. It was felt that there was insufficient interaction with the employer in the process of writing the report. For example, in some cases the report had suggested that the college should provide specific software to support an employee, when the college already had a similar package installed on all computers. This resulted in time

22

being wasted whilst establishing whether it was indeed necessary to buy new software. It was noted that for some employers the potential costs of implementing the suggestions made in the Access to Work report could be prohibitive and could deter them from taking on a neurodivergent employee.

The college had also had contact with a regional charity for people with autism which provided a support worker for an autistic member of staff, at no cost to the college or employee. This was available because the employee had previously been on Job Seeker’s Allowance (JSA) and the service being provided was government-funded. The adviser was involved in identifying support and training needs and advising on adaptations even before the new recruit started working at the college. They accompanied the employee on their first day to introduce themselves to the employer and visited the employee at work once a week to check on progress. There was also an arrangement between the adviser, employee and college that the college could discuss any problems with the adviser if they did not feel able to address them directly with the employee. The employer found the assistance that the adviser provided very helpful.

More generally the HR manager felt that provision to support employers of staff with neurological conditions was inadequate. She felt that employers needed a straightforward guide to the adaptations that might be necessary depending on the traits of the employee. She felt that a list which guided the employer through adaptations that would be appropriate for particular conditions would help employers and employees to start a discussion about what was required. As she saw it, one of the potential barriers was that employees felt unable to ask for adaptations and employers were uncertain how to broach the subject. A general guide of this nature could be used as a starting point to prompt more detailed discussions between the two parties.

As an FE college, the gym manager also felt that they could potentially have a role in increasing knowledge of neurodivergence amongst other employers. This could be done through training and short secondments at the college, giving those from other organisations the opportunity to learn more about neurological conditions and to understand more about how work can be organised to accommodate greater neurodiversity and the type of support that might be required. He felt that there should be greater funding for employers thinking of taking on staff with neurological conditions to cover the costs of awareness training and to support commercial organisations to arrange work in a way that facilitated the employment of neurodivergent staff.

23

3. CASE STUDY 2 - LARGE PRIVATE SECTOR EMPLOYER

3.1 The organisation

The second case study was of a large private sector employer in the professional and financial services industry. It operated globally and employees were spread across multiple sites in the UK and abroad. The case study visit was to a London office, but some of the interviewees were based at other sites across Britain, or were sometimes seconded to work on-site with clients. The main focus of discussions was on UK operations. All employees had a manager two grades higher who acted as a line manager. This was in addition to managers leading particular projects.

The organisation employed more than 10,000 staff across the UK. Due to the size of the organisation, it was difficult for respondents to estimate the proportion of employees with neurological conditions, as formal monitoring focused on whether employees had a disability, rather than the nature of their condition. Under two per cent of staff were recorded as having any type of disability, but HR managers felt that not all employees with a disability chose to formally disclose this to the employer.

3.2 Respondents

The HR managers interviewed included those responsible for the recruitment of experienced staff (as opposed to those coming in through a graduate recruitment scheme), diversity and inclusion and employment relations. They are referred to as HR1, HR2 and HR3 throughout.

The line manager (known as LM) worked in a department which provided outsourced HR services, such as payroll, to clients. She had been with the firm for 11 years and progressed up through the grades. She had occupied her current position for nearly three years and managed between two and eight people at any given point in time, including a member of staff with dyslexia. Her responsibilities including training staff, managing the team to carry out tasks, checking and signing off work and client liaison. Communications with clients were often by e-mail due to the fact that they were based all over the world and so subject to time differences.

The six employees interviewed (known as E1 to E6) were spread across five different grades, from a junior level to the one below the most senior. They covered both the financial and non-financial arms of the business and were engaged in a range of different activities from advising global clients on strategy, management consultancy, providing financial services and data analysis, designing and delivering training, assurance and investigating fraud. Almost all employee respondents had been with the firm for two years or more and the longest period was six years. Half of them spent at least a portion of their time working at the premises of clients in the UK or abroad.

Four of the interviewees were diagnosed with at least one neurological condition before joining the firm and two were only diagnosed after they had worked for the firm for some time. E1 was diagnosed with dyslexia and dyspraxia at the age of 15, but at the time of interview was also under assessment for ADHD. E2 was

24

diagnosed with dyslexia within the first nine months of joining the firm, due to the impact it was having on his work.

E3 was diagnosed with dyslexia whilst doing a postgraduate degree prior to joining the firm. E4 had only been diagnosed with dyspraxia and dyslexia six months prior to the case study interview and whilst at the firm. This diagnosis also came about because she was struggling with aspects of the job. E5 was diagnosed with dyslexia at the age of seven and E6 was also diagnosed with dyslexia at around age seven or eight.

3.3 Neurodiversity policies and practices

The company had a formal written equal opportunities policy which covered disability in general, but it did not specifically mention neurological conditions. However, the organisation had an established disability network and also had networks for staff with dyslexia and autism. The organisation was seeking to become more ‘disability confident’ [HR2], with an HR manager responsible for ensuring that this aspiration was realised across the business, working alongside all the departments which played a part in putting this into practice, as well as the disability networks.

It was apparent that some neurodivergent respondents were unaware of the full range of support that was available to them. Whilst many spoke highly of the support that they had received, a need to provide a succinct central resource for those with neurological conditions was identified. It was suggested that a website with links would be helpful so that employees were reminded of relevant networks and mentoring and the type of support that was available more generally.

The following sections describe how employment practices sought to ensure that the organisation was neurodiverse and any difficulties encountered by employees with neurological conditions.

3.3.1 Recruitment practices

The majority of vacant posts at the firm were advertised externally, although some were only available to internal applicants. Roles advertised externally appeared on the company website, but posts were also advertised internally for existing employees to refer any contacts who they thought might be suitable. Recruitment agencies were also used for the majority of posts. Whilst the firm sought to maintain good channels of communication with the agencies that it used, it was noted that they were reliant on the recruitment agencies to convey the message that the firm was keen to recruit a diverse range of employees and to deal with any enquiries from potential applicants with neurological conditions correctly.

Applicants were required to complete an online form and upload their CV. They were also asked to complete an online equal opportunities form as part of their application, but this information was held separately from the job application itself. A recruitment helpline was available to applicants if they had any general questions on the process. One respondent with dyslexia who was recruited through an agency explained that most of the online form was completed by the agency and he was only required to provide basic information. He reported that his condition was not a disadvantage in the process, but that this may have been partly due to the support that the agency provided. However, he did describe

25

recruitment as ‘a very lengthy process with not much communication and quite a bit of stress on my part’ [E1].

Shortlisting involved ruling out candidates who failed to meet certain criteria. The criteria were likely to include both objective and subjective measures. For example, a consultant would require a stipulated professional qualification, but their previous experience and work history would also be considered important. All shortlisted candidates were contacted to ask if they required any adjustments to the interview process. This contact could be by telephone or email, depending on the preferences that the applicant indicated in their application. However, the firm preferred to contact applicants by telephone unless the candidate had expressed a preference for e-mail contact. The selection process for some posts included tests, but this was more common in junior roles and varied depending on the nature of the job. Those joining through the graduate scheme were also given a psychometric test and asked to undertake a written task prior to interview. Shortlisted candidates were asked whether they required any adjustments to these tests due to a disability. There was an assessment centre following the first interview for graduates, which included a group exercise. Candidates were also interviewed by senior managers. A respondent with dyslexia reported that he did not experience any problems with the written tests. The biggest challenge for him was the group test, as he would have found it difficult to write on a flipchart, but another member of the group was willing to perform this role.

One respondent had been headhunted by the firm, having previously worked alongside members of her current team whilst working for another organisation. Some years prior to this she had applied to join the firm, but was not shortlisted. Having the opportunity to demonstrate her skills, rather than being judged on the basis of a written application, was an important factor in her recruitment. She also mentioned that the manager who hired her had a child with learning difficulties and had commented that ‘if I had one leg, it makes me disabled and I can’t run, but I could probably hop or walk’. She commented that ‘before, if I was telling someone, I would be a little bit afraid of what they might think and think that I was not very clever’, but his experience of learning difficulties and her past work meant that he was more interested in what she could do, rather than what was difficult.

3.3.2 Following interview

Successful applicants were given a further opportunity to ask for any adjustments that they required to do their job at the point when they were offered the post. At this point disclosure of a neurological condition would be recorded for the individual, rather than just on an anonymised basis. The firm did not require a formal diagnosis to offer support to employees.

A respondent who had disclosed their dyslexia on joining the firm reported being given a needs assessment at this stage. This involved identifying computer software which was helpful to her in doing her job, i.e. ‘read and write’ literacy support software and a Dictaphone which enables individuals to vocally connect to their personal computer. She reported that whilst this slowed her down, it ‘eliminates a lot of the errors that I would have made naturally’ and that she would not be able to do her job without it [E6].

26

3.3.3 Induction

The induction period covered the first two days in the job. The first day consisted of a corporate induction. This was attended by all new staff, regardless of seniority or role. They also met someone from their team on the first day to be their initial point of contact. The disability networks were mentioned as part of the corporate induction and new staff were provided with information on how to obtain more details. The second day of the induction was focused on IT. Staff were given a company laptop and an introduction to IT at the firm.

A respondent with dyslexia reported that he found the induction process daunting due to the large quantity of information provided. Some of this was seen as unnecessary and overwhelming. However, the fact that the handouts were provided by e-mail was seen as useful. Whilst he did recall being told about the dyslexia network during the induction, he did not feel that what they do was highlighted sufficiently. In his case, he only joined the network because a couple of colleagues were in the network and talked to him about it. Another respondent who was aware that he had dyslexia on joining also commented that he was not really aware of the network initially.

3.3.4 Training

A respondent with dyslexia found the use that the company made of external web-based training courses difficult. He felt that the pace was too fast and some of the content not relevant. He commented that the courses were ‘far too technical for you to just listen to once, understand what they're thinking and use it’. His preference was for classroom-based courses with examples and more time to absorb information and understand its relevance. He contrasted the fast pace of the web-based training courses with the fact that extra time was available for dyslexic employees taking professional exams. He felt that the extra time to read and understand was important in the context of training, as well as taking exams.

Another respondent with dyslexia described how she went early to training sessions so that she could explain to the leader that she had dyslexia and to ask them not to ask her to read anything out loud. She did not feel that training was particularly designed with the fact that people might have diverse learning styles in mind.

In terms of any specific training for employees with neurological conditions on techniques for managing their condition, a respondent at a senior level within the firm commented that ‘there is some allowance made for specific tools so my mapping tools and things like that are made available, but to ask for specific training would not be necessarily a good thing for your career’ [E2]. This was not due to the subjective judgement of others, but because all staff were judged against the same performance benchmarks, which covered sales and revenue, risk management, operational performance, people management and external profile. Spending a couple of days on training meant ‘two days out of the market and that's two days of sales lost in a year’ [E2]. The employee stated that ‘I currently work, on average... an 80-hour week... taking time out to do some of these, some interventions like that can be very difficult, particularly at senior levels in our organisation. I'd say at more junior levels it's definitely possible and probably supported, but at more senior levels there is less scope for doing those things’ [E2].

27

One respondent also felt that formal training for line managers on neurodivergence would be helpful. This might assist them in recognising conditions and reducing the problems that arose where an employee did not disclose their condition, or had not been diagnosed. She also felt that this training might filter down to other employees and increase awareness more generally. However, another respondent questioned whether it would be feasible to train line managers on all the different types of neurodivergence. He also noted that junior staff often rotated between managers on a regular basis, so there was limited value in training managers on one neurological condition when they would only be managing that particular employee for a period of six months or so anyway. In his view, it was more important to ensure that employees with a neurological condition felt able to disclose this to their manager when they started working for them and for the manager to respond in a supportive way and ask how they could help. A line manager who had an employee approach them about their dyslexia also reported that their openness about the sorts of difficulties they faced and ways of working made it ‘a non-issue’ [LM]. However, she thought some training on neurodiversity to employees in general would be helpful in e